Advancing Gender Equality in Business & Management Schools

1. Introduction

Lancaster University Management School hosted an online roundtable as a Gender Equality Observatory (GEO) event on Advancing GE in Business & Management Schools on 23 April 2024. The Gender Equality Observatory Network has been established by the EU-funded Horizon2020 TARGETED-MPI project (Transparent And Resilient Gender Equality Through Integrated Monitoring Planning and Implementation). The key aims of the network include sharing knowledge regarding the advancement of Gender Equality (GE) and monitoring the implementation of Gender Equality Plans (GEP) in Business and Management (B&M) Schools. The founding network members of the GEO include Athens University of Economics and Business (AUEB, Greece), Lancaster University Management School (LUMS, UK), Stockholm School of Economics (SSE, Sweden), Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB, Belgium), and the American University of Beirut (AUB, Lebanon).

As part of the online roundtable, members from five partner B&M schools shared a range of innovative initiatives implemented in each of their institutions as part of TARGETED-MPI objectives. This led to a lively discussion between TARGETED-MPI partner universities and the online attendees from B&M schools in Europe, North America, and Asia as they discussed the internal and external challenges and enablers faced during implementation. The roundtable also gave the attendees an opportunity to collectively explore lessons learned in GEP implementation and integrating GE planning into organisational strategy and practice. The roundtable aimed to assist partner organisations and B&M schools in tailoring approaches to their specific contexts while fostering innovation and unique strategies to advance GE. Here are some of the major themes that emerged from the online roundtable.

2. Post-partner presentations: Themes from the Questions and Answers segment

2.1 Sustaining the impact and implementation of GEP actions

The partners, along with audience members, discussed the best ways to ensure that the impact and implementation of GEP actions are sustained. LUMS said that their primary objective with the GEO and the online roundtable was to continue to monitor the work toward advancing GE after the end of the project.  Whilst SSE reflected that as part of the project, their focus has been to bring change within and outside the institution. This way, SSE added, as students and employees leave the institution, they will sustain that change. Further, SSE established a GE fund as part of the project for which the community decides on the kind of activities that can be funded through it, thus leading to institutional change.  AUB added that they had also undertaken several strategies to institutionalise GE so as to sustain the results of the programme and institutionalise the responsibility of GE and inclusion.

According to AUEB, as they were operating in a very gendered environment in Greece, they believed no one would continue these efforts after the end of the project. So, they formed a network of GE committees, equivalent to the GEOs across higher education institutions in Greece. As higher education institutions are centrally managed and financed in Greece, AUEB lobbied and successfully made efforts to establish GE units in all universities in Greece. Further, through these GEOs, AUEB will also be able to ask for funds from the Ministry of Education, thus continuing the implementation of GE activities.

2.2 Mentorship programmes as GE interventions

The panel and the audience discussed the best ways to ensure the efficacy of the mentorship programmes if they are to advance GE. VUB recounted their experience and said many women felt the need to talk to their equals, and if they are offered the opportunity to do so, it can help. LUMS added that they instituted a mentorship programme where everyone could have an allocated mentor and that they worked with the faculty manager to envision what this relationship might look like and designed guidelines so that people know more about what the mentoring programme would set out to do. While an audience member emphasised the importance of peer-to-peer relationships as compared to mentorship from a higher-level employee, saying that sometimes one might want to talk about childcare to a person who has been in a similar position. AUB also pointed out that informal mentoring can often yield greater benefits compared to formal mentorship structures. For instance, when junior faculty engage in informal discussions with senior faculty members, the exchange can be particularly advantageous. Additionally, AUB highlighted the importance of having female faculty members in senior positions. Such individuals wield significant influence and can actively address gender biases in recruitment processes, ensuring that candidates are evaluated based on their professional merits rather than personal factors. LUMS added that in their mentorship programme, depending on one’s position, one is matched with a mentor with similar life and career experience, and this can change as the employee’s needs evolve. LUMS gave the example that if an employee has just come from maternity leave, they would get matched with someone who had a similar lived experience as part of the mentorship programme.

2.3 Ensuring GE work does not further burden women

As participants deliberated on strategies to ensure the work of advancing GE does not add to the burden of work for women, LUMS discussed the efforts made in the institution to ensure that the GE work did not add additional roles to the existing workload of employees. LUMS gave the example of their mentorship programme which was made part of the workload plan, and all Equality Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) related work is work loaded for academic mentors. On similar lines, VUB added that to prevent the overburdening of women, they perform a relief exercise every few years to assess the targets academics need to fulfil and accordingly choose a certain profile based on what they want to focus on, including research tasks, teaching tasks or policy-making, and remove tasks that may contribute to overburdening. VUB added that starting from this year, they are undertaking a gender analysis to assess which tasks women academics are performing and which tasks are contributing to overburdening in terms of work. AUB said that their strategy was to institutionalise GE in their university so that the onus of GE would be on the institution and not just on the women in the institution. Further, as part of their efforts, the institution appointed someone who officially does EDI work to work with the provost’s office and faculties.

2.4 Staff child-care and well-being

Staff child-care and well-being were also discussed among panel members as an intervention for advancing GE. AUEB spoke about their initiative to reestablish a subsidised summer camp for the children of staff members that would run during the July to September period when elementary schools are closed. AUB added that they also started summer camps for the children of AUB staff, some of these aimed at mentoring children to get admission into AUB courses.

3. Lessons learned in implementing GEPs: Addressing institutional barriers and/or leveraging existing enablers

3.1 Collaborations and engagement with internal and external stakeholders are key

In a panel discussion, the B&M schools discussed the lessons learned in implementing GEPs in their institutions. LUMS talked about the importance of aligning project goals with what other actors were doing at the university, as several GE policies and initiatives were already in place. Agreeing with LUMS on the importance of establishing collaborations with key stakeholders, VUB also said that since the university already has certain structures in place due to legal obligation, it was important to foster and feed collaborations with internal and central services. AUB emphasised the importance of forming coalitions and navigating the power relations of the department, as internal politics and engagement with leadership were the biggest challenges in terms of implementing GEPs.

3.2 Aligning agendas and building allies

While discussing enablers for implementing GEP, partners agreed that networking and stakeholder engagement was essential. LUMS highlighted that it was also important to collaborate with the right people who could influence and effect change and that they had regular planning and monitoring of meetings with stakeholders in their project planning. Further, LUMS stressed the importance of being flexible in the face of changing priorities and external environments and prioritising actions that can be integrated into systemic changes. They gave the example of gender-disaggregated data reporting, which had a long-term impact on and traction with senior leadership. VUB emphasised the value of having leaders attuned to gender sensitivity within the institution, noting that some individuals in leadership roles are strongly committed to advancing GE initiatives. However, they may occasionally require support from a wider cohort of staff members, a role that VUB was able to facilitate. Thus, forging alliances with like-minded allies can significantly bolster efforts to advance these initiatives, according to VUB.

AUB emphasised the necessity of presenting GE initiatives in the most effective manner to senior management. They illustrated this point by aligning their project objectives with the national accreditation criteria mandated by the university, which evaluates Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) standards. AUB further explained that the crucial step towards securing continued support from leadership involves gathering data to demonstrate gender disparities and highlighting how the project addresses these issues. AUEB stressed the significance of engaging with external stakeholders and students, emphasising the importance of educating students in B&M schools about GE, as they represent the future of educational institutions and can play a pivotal role in fostering lasting societal changes. Additionally, AUB underscored the importance of inclusive communication in building alliances, particularly with male allies, highlighting that addressing sexist remarks or microaggressions within the university environment can foster greater solidarity in combating such behaviours.